first of all, congrats to the meet directors and all the volunteers on a job well done. so organized and efficient!! very impressive. the only thing i wish someone could explain to me is why the usms champ. committee changed the team scoring from large, medium and small team to clumping everyone in the same category. seems extremely unfair to have what i call "real teams" competing against state mega teams. there is no possibility for "real teams" to ever come close to competing against them. if you are going to give team awards at the end of the meet, is there any way you can do it fairly? our team is extremely proud to have gotten as many team members as we did to go to natls. (most of them for the first time), but unfortunately they were very disillusioned (as was i) with the idea that we would be competing against state teams. as one of the coaches i didn't have an explanation. even though we were very proud of our 7th place finish in men's division, and our 12th place in combined, we were only one of a few "real teams" in the top ten. would appreciate responses. maybe even someone from the champ.committee could explain how they felt this scoring system would be more fair to the majority of swimmers. then i can pass it along to my teammates.. i don't want them to be so disillusioned that they lose interest in attending any future natls. thanks
It's not like teams are lining up to host in order to get the banner:
And Paul makes an excellent that these is a lack of a clear mission within our House of Delegates, for which I am greatly responsible. To this point, the HOD spend an hour in passionate debate about who takes home a banner from national, yet we blew right by what I feel is a bigger issue, that there was only one bidder for each of our 2009 nationals. God bless Indi and Clovis, but if USMS nationals isn’t viewed as an attractive property (positive cash flow to host, community impact, increased local membership, etc) then, in my opinion, we have bigger problems than who gets a banner.
It's not like teams are lining up to host in order to get the banner:
And Paul makes an excellent that these is a lack of a clear mission within our House of Delegates, for which I am greatly responsible. To this point, the HOD spend an hour in passionate debate about who takes home a banner from national, yet we blew right by what I feel is a bigger issue, that there was only one bidder for each of our 2009 nationals. God bless Indi and Clovis, but if USMS nationals isn’t viewed as an attractive property (positive cash flow to host, community impact, increased local membership, etc) then, in my opinion, we have bigger problems than who gets a banner.
